Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2022-12
Examining the Factor Structure and Measurement Invariance of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale Across Taiwanese and American University Students
The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) is a widely used measure of emotion dysregulation. However, limited research has examined its factor structure and measurement invariance in cross-national samples. The present study tested competing measurement models and the measurement invariance of the DERS in university student samples from the United States (n = 324) and Taiwan (n = 399). Results indicated that the bifactor model with the Awareness subscale items removed demonstrated the best fit. The results of model-based indices provided evidence for the general emotion dysregulation factor of the DERS. Cross-national measurement invariance testing found partial strong invariance. These findings indicate that DERS would best be used as a measure of general emotion dysregulation among college students in the United States and Taiwan. These findings emphasize that future work is needed to examine cross-national differences in the construct and assessment of emotion dysregulation.
AckermanT. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(1), 67–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1992.tb00368.x
2.
AldaoA.GeeD.De Los ReyesA.SeagerI. (2016). Emotion regulation as a transdiagnostic factor in the development of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology: Current and future directions. Development and Psychopathology, 28(4pt1), 927–946. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579419000348
3.
BardeenJ. R.FergusT. A.HannanS. M.OrcuttH. K. (2016). Addressing psychometric limitations of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale through item modification. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(3), 298–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-012-9280-y
4.
BardeenJ. R.FergusT. A.OrcuttH. K. (2012). An examination of the latent structure of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 34(3), 382–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-012-9280-y
5.
BeauchaineT. P. (2015). Future directions in emotion dysregulation and youth psychopathology. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44(5), 875–896. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2015.1038827
6.
BhatnagarP.ShuklaM.PandeyR. (2020). Validating the factor structure of the Hindi version of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 42(2), 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-020-09796-6
7.
BjurebergJ.LjotssonB.TullM. T.HedmanE.SahlinH.LundhL.BjarehedJ.DiLilloD.Messman-MooreT.GumpertC. H.GratzK. L. (2016). Development and validation of a brief version of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale: The DERS-16. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(2), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-015-9514-x
8.
BonifayW.LaneS. P.ReiseS. P. (2017). Three concerns with applying a bifactor model as a structure of psychopathology. Clinical Psychological Science, 5(1), 184–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702616657069
9.
BrownT. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
10.
ByrneB.ShavelsonR.MuthenB. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456
11.
ChenF. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1005–1018. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013193
12.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5
13.
DiStefanoC.MorganG. B. (2014). A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling, 21(3), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373
14.
DueberD. M. (2017). Bifactor indices calculator: A microsoft excel-based tool to calculate various indices relevant to bifactor CFA models. https://doi.org/10.13023/edp.tool.01
15.
FowlerJ. C.CharakR.ElhaiJ. D.AllenJ. G.FruehB. C.OldhamJ. M. (2014). Construct validity and factor structure of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale among adults with severe mental illness. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 58, 175–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.07.029
16.
GeisingerK. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaption issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 304–312. http://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.304
17.
GratzK. L.,RoemerL. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000007455.08539.94
18.
GratzK. L.RosenthalM. Z.TullM. T.LejuezC. W.GundersonJ. G. (2006). An experimental investigation of emotion dysregulation in borderline personality disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(4), 850–855. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843x.115.4.850
19.
GrossJ. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative Review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271
20.
HallionL. S.SteinmanS. A.TolinD. F.DiefenbachG. J. (2018). Psychometric properties of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) and its short forms in adults with emotional disorders. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 539. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00539
HollandP. W.ThayerD. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In WainerH.BraunH. I. (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129–145). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
23.
HsuY. C. (2014). Explore the relation of adolescents’ self-harm motivation, separation-individuation, emotion regulation and self-harm behaviors. (Master's thesis). National Taiwan Normal University.
24.
International Test Commission (2018). The ITC Guidelines for translating and adapting tests (second edition). International Journal of Testing, 18(2), 101–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2017.1398166
25.
KaufmanE. A.XiaM.FoscoG.YaptangcoM.SkidmoreC. R.CrowellS. E. (2016). The difficulties in emotion regulation scale short form (DERS-SF): Validation and replication in adolescent and adult samples. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(3), 443–455, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-015-9529-3
26.
KlineR. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
27.
KökönyeiG.UrbánR.ReinhardtM.AnnaJ.DemetrovicsZ. (2014). The difficulties in emotion regulation scale: Factor structure in chronic pain patients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(6), 589–600. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22036
28.
LeeD. J.WitteT. K.BardeenJ. R.DavisM. T.WeathersF. W. (2016). A factor analytic evaluation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72(9), 933–946. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22297
29.
LiC. H. (2016). The performance of ML, DWLS, and ULS estimation with robust corrections in structural equation models with ordinal variables. Psychological Methods, 21(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000093
30.
LinehanM. M. (1993). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality. Guilford Press.
31.
LuM. C. (2007). Exploring the relation of the motivation of deliberate self-harm, negative affect, experiential avoidance, emotion regulation and adolescents’ deliberate self-harm behaviors, (Master's thesis). National Chengchi University.
32.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224
33.
MatsumotoD.YooS. H.NakagawaS.Multinational Study of Cultural Display Rules. (2008). Culture, emotion regulation, and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(6), 925–937. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.925
34.
MeadeA. W.JohnsonE. C.BraddyP. W. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 568–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.568
35.
MoshagenM.MuschJ. (2014). Sample size requirements of the robust weighted least squares estimator. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 10(2), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000068
36.
NeumannA.van LierP. A. C.GratzK. L.KootH. M. (2010). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation difficulties in adolescents using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Assessment, 17(1), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191109349579
37.
NordgrenL.MonellE.BirgegardA.BjurebergJ.HesserH. (2020). Factor structure of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale in treatment seeking adults with eating disorders. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 42(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-019-09765-8
38.
OsborneT. L.MichonskiJ.SayrsJ.WelchS. S.AndersonL. K. (2017). Factor structure of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) in adult outpatients receiving Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 39(2), 355–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-017-9586-x
39.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, URL. https://www.R-project.org/
40.
ReiseS. P.ScheinesR.WidamanK. F.HavilandM. G. (2013). Multidimensionality and structural coefficient bias in structural equation modeling: A bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164412449831
41.
RodriguezA.ReiseS. P.HavilandM. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000045
42.
RubyM. B.FalkC. F.HeineS. J.VillaC.SilbersteinO. (2012). Not all collectivisms are equal: Opposing preferences for ideal affect between East Asians and Mexicans. Emotion, 12, 1206–1209. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029118
43.
SkutchJ. M.WangS. B.BuqoT.HaynosA. F.PapaA. (2019). Which brief is best? Clarifying the use of three brief versions of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 41(3), 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10862-019-09736-Z
44.
SnowN. L.WardR. M.BeckerS. P.RavalV. V. (2013). Measurement invariance of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale in India and the United States. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 3(1), 147–215. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v3n1p147
45.
SteenkampJ. B. E.BaumgartnerH. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90. http://doi.org/10.1086/209528
46.
Van de VijverF.TanzerN. K. (2004). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. European Review of Applied Psychology, 54(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004
47.
VictorS. E.KlonskyE. D. (2016). Validation of a brief version of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale in five samples. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(4), 582–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-016-9547-9
48.
WuA. D.LiuY.StoneJ. E.ZouD.ZumboB. D. (2017). Is difference in measurement outcome between groups differential responding, bias or disparity? A methodology for detecting bias and impact from an attributional stance. Frontiers in Education, 2, 39. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00039
49.
Yang-WallentinF.JöreskogK. G.LuoH. (2010). Confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables with misspecified models. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(3), 392–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2010.489003
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
